Aeport  of  the  Kansas  Conferen 
Cormittee 


F 

685 
C627 


REPORT   OF   THE   KANSAS    CON-FERENCE    COMMITTEE. 


SPEECH 

OF 


HON.  JACOB  (;OLLxiMER,  OF  VERMONT 


Delivered   in  the  Senate  of   the   United  States,  April  27,  1858. 


The  Senate  having  under  consideration  the 
report  of  the  committee  of  conference  on  the 
disagreeing  votes  of  the  two  Houses  on  the  bill 
for  the  admission  of  the  State  of  Kansas  into  the 
Union — 

Mr.  COLLAMER  said : 

Mr.  President  :  I  do  not  propose,  at  this  time, 
to  occupy  the  Senate  at  any  great  length  ;  but  I 
shall  endeavor,  as  succinctly  and  as  distinctly  as 
I  can,  o  state,  in  the  first  place,  why  I,  together 
with  those  who  act  with  me,  opposed  the  Senate 
bill,  without  guing  into  the  argument  on  its  mer- 
its ;  and,  in  the  second  place,  why  we  voted  for 
the  amendment  of  the  House  of  Representatives  ; 
and,  in  the  third  place,  why  we  cannot  vote  for 
the  proposition  now  offered. 

First,  as  to  the  Senate  bill :  its  substance  was, 
if  adopted,  that  it  admitted  Kansas  into  the  Union 
as  a  State  under  the  Lecompton  Constitution, 
without  any  further  action  of  the  people.  Our 
objections  consisted  essentially  in  these :  that 
that  Constitution  was  framed  by  a  Convention 
which  was  the  fruit  and  result  of  usurpation  and 
fraud  ;  that  the  usurpation  which  had  been  insti- 
tuted originally,  continued  so  as  to  deprive  the 
people  of  the  opportunity  of  free  voting  on  the 
subject  of  calling  a  Convention  ;  that  an  unfair 
and  imperfect  census  was  taken,  by  which  a 
large  part  of  the  people  were  deprived  of  the 
chance  of  voting  for  delegates;  that  the  Consti- 
tution was  formed  in  defiance  of  the  will  of  the 
people,  as  manifested  in  their  then  recent  elec- 
tion for  a  Territorial  Legislature,  and  was  made, 
in  point  of  fact,  only  by  those  who  acted  in  and 
approved  of  it,  by  a  minority  of  those  originally 
elected  to  the  Convention;  that  the  Constitution 
was  professed  to  be  presented  to  the  people  in  a 
disguised  and  deceptive  form  ;  that  the  people 
themselves  were  deprived  of  the  opportunity 
which  had  been  promised  to  them,  of  passing 
upon  the  whole  Constitution ;  that  an  election 


was  held,  wherein  they  professed  to  obtain  some 
six  thousand  votes  for  the  Constitution  with  Sla- 
very ;  that  an  election  for  State  officers  was 
made  under  that  Constitution  by  officers  not  in 
any  way  appointed  by  the  people,  and  unknown 
to  the  law;  that  that  election  was  fraudulently 
conducted;  and  that,  besides  all  this,  the  peo- 
ple, at  an  election  held  on  the  4th  of  January,  b; 
virtue  of  an  act  of  the  Territorial  Legislature,  b 
a  very  large  majority,  repudiated  it.  These,  pat 
together  and  aggregated,  constituted  our  objec- 
tion to  the  Lecompton  Constitution ;  and  for 
these  reasons  we  considered  that  it  ought  not  lo 
receive  the  attention  of  Congress  ;  that  the  State 
should  not  be  admitted  under  it ;  and  tnat  it  was 
not  entitled  to  be  regarded  in  any  measure  as  a 
Constitution  presenting  the  views  of  the  people 
of  Kansas. 

In  all  these  respects  the  Senate,  by  a  large 
majority,  voted  us  down.  Our  objection  was  not 
merely  that  the  Constitution  had  not  been  sub- 
mitted to  the  people.  We  insisted  that,  in  point 
of  fact,  the  people  had,  on  the  4th  of  January, 
under  lawful  authority,  voted  directly  to  reject 
it  by  a  very  large  majority.  That,  to  be  sure, 
among  others,  was  ground  of  complaint ;  but  all 
these  objections,  and  others  which  were  present- 
ed by  other  gentlemen,  were  aggregated  in  the 
complaint.  The  Senate,  however,  decided  that, 
in  point  of  fact,  the  Lecompton  Constitution  was 
the  Constitution  of  Kansas,  so  far  as  the  action 
of  Kansas  was  concerned  ;  and  that  it  was  only 
for  Congress  to  say  whether  they  would  accept 
it ;  that  the  people  had  made  that  Constitution 
legally  by  their  delegates — not  only  formed  it, 
but  adopted  it,  and  that  the  only  question  of 
difference  existing  there  was  one  in  relation  to 
Slavery,  which,  as  they  said,  was  fairly  submit- 
ted. They  therefore  passed  a  bill  admitting  Kan- 
sas as  a  State  with  that  Constitution. 

I  next  call  attention  to  the  amendment  pre- 


sented  by  the  House  of  Representatives.  What 
was  its  character?  Why  was  it  voted  for ?  So 
far  as  I  could  understand  it,  the  substance  of 
it,  without  recurring  to  particulars,  insisted  on 
three  things  :  first,  that  the  Lecompton  Consti- 
tution should  be  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  peo- 
ple, and  if  they  adopted  it,  very  well — it  was  to 
stand  ;  but,  second,  if  they  did  not  adopt  it,  they 
should  ]>roceed,  by  a  Convention,  to  form  such  a 
Constitution  as  they  wished  ;  and  that,  upon  be- 
ing ratified  by  the  people,  they  should  be  ad- 
mitted as  a  State  with  such  new  Constitution ; 
and,  third,  in  order  to  secure  fair  elections  on 
the  Constitution,  a  board  was  formed,  consisting 
of  the  Governor  and  Secretary  of  the  Territory, 
appointed  by  the  President,  and  of  the  presiding 
officers  of  the  two  Houses  of  the  Territorial  Leg- 
islature, elected  by  the  people  ;  and  this  board 
was  to  direct  and  control  the  elections  and  their 
returns,  pass  upon  them,  and  finally  decide  them. 
That  was  the  proposition  which  came  to  us  as 
an  amendment  from  the  House  of  Represent- 
atives. .  Why  did  we  vote  for  it?  In  the  first 
place,  it  would  be  sutficient  for  me  to  say  that 
here  were  presented  to  us  two  alternatives — on 
the  one  hand,  the  Lecompton  Constitution,  which 
had  been  rejected  by  the  people  of  Kansas,  most 
imperatively  and  conclusively,  and,  on  the  other, 
an  offer  to  submit  it  to  the  people,  accompanied 
by  a  provision,  that  if  they  did  not  like  it  they 
might  make  another  Constitution  which  they 
did  like.  Could  there  be  any  hesitation  as  to 
how  we  should  vote  in  regard  to  these  two  al- 
ternatives ?  Could  there  be  any  doubt  as  to  the 
choice  we  should  make  between  them  ? 

In  the  next  place,  if  we  voted  against  the 
House  amendment,  we  deprived  the  people  of 
Kansas  even  of  the  right  of  establishing  a  free 
Constitution  ;  we  left  them  to  have  the  Lecomp- 
ton Constitution  imposed  upon  them,  and  gave 
them  no  opportunity  to  form  a  free  one.  Hence 
we  voted  for  that  proposition.  Again,  it  was 
fair — it  was  fair  even  to  those  who  claim  that 
the  people,  in  forming  their  Constitution,  may 
make  it  a  free-State  or  a  slave-State  Constitu- 
tion, as  they  please,  because  it  offered  that  op- 
portunity. That  proposition  was  a  very  liberal 
step  for  those  gentlemen  to  take — and  there  are 
some  such  in  the  country — who  hold  that  the 
people,  in  the  formation  of  a  State  Constitution 
even,  have  not  the  right  to  enslave  their  fellow- 
men.  But  those  gentlemen,  if  any  such  there 
were  in  the  two  Houses,  voted  for  it  with  great 
liberality.  And  why  ?  First,  because  it  was  the 
best  of  the  two  alternatives  offered  to  them. 
Next,  because,  after  the  knowledge  of  the  vote 
of  the  4th  of  January,  disclosing  ten  thousand 
majority  against  this  Constitution,  there  was 
every  moral  certainty  that  when  the  Lecompton 
Constitution,  with  Slavery,  was  presented  to  the 
people  of  Kansas,  it  would  be  rejected  ;  and 
there  was  therefore  no  hazard  in  voting  to  give 
them  an  opportunity  of  that  kind. 

But,  sir,  we  were  induced  to  vote  for  the  House 
amendment  for  arot'ier  consideration;  and  that 
is,  that  it  provided  a  fair  board  by  which  elec- 
tions were  to  be  conducted.  We  said  the  pre- 
■■'ous  elections  in  Kansas  had  been  controlled 


by  violence,  "and  corruption,  and  fraud,  but  here 
was  a  chance  to  have  them  safely  and  honestly 
conducted  ;  and  so  much  security  was  felt  in  the 
board  provided  by  the  House  amendment,  that 
we  were  even  willing  to  say,  that  when  that 
board  had  supervised  the  election,  appointed  the 
officers,  received  the  returns,  and  adjudicated 
upon  those  returns,  the  whole  subject  might  be 
settled  by  the  proclamation  of  the  President,  and 
we  were  led  to  the  latter  merely  from  confidence 
in  the  former  provision. 

But  another  consideration,  and  perhaps  the 
most  important  of  them  all,  was  that  the  House 
amendment  proposed  a  course  of  proceeding 
which  would  put  an  end  to  this  controversy  in 
either  event  and  at  all  events.  If  the  people  of 
Kansas  received  and  accepted  the  Lecompton 
Constitution  by  the  vote  of  a  majority,  they  were 
to  be  received  ;  and  if  they  did  not,  they  were 
to  call  a  new  Convention  and  form  such  a  Con- 
stitution as  they  pleased,  and  when  that  Consti- 
tution was  ratified  tbey  were  to  be  admitted. 
There  was  to  be  the  end  of  the  controversy.  It 
was  because  the  House  amendment  did  end  the 
controversy  that  it  commended  itself  to  the  ac- 
ceptance of  those  who  voted  for  it  on  this  side 
of  the  Chamber. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  I  come  to  the  next  step  : 
the  proposition  which  is  offered  as  a  substitute 
for  both  those  bills — the  proposition  of  the  com- 
mittee of  conference.  I  do  not  propose  to  go 
into  its  details ;  but  let  us  see  whether  it  gives 
to  those  of  us  who  voted  against  enforcing  the 
Lecompton  Constitution  upon  the  people  without 
their  consent,  and  who  voted  for  the  proposition 
of  the  House  of  Representatives,  those  leading 
features  of  security,  and  those  objects  which  we 
desired  to  attain,  which  were  given  to  us  in  the 
latter  proposition.  I  will  state  its  leading  pro- 
visions. The  first  is,  that  the  Lecompton  Con- 
stitution shall  be  presented  to  the  people  of  Kan- 
sas for  their  acceptance  or  rejection.  "  Uh,  no,'' 
says  the  honorable  Senator  from  Virginia,  [Mr. 
Hunter,]  "  it  does  not  submit  the  Constitution 
to  the  people."  The  majority  of  the  Senate,  by 
the  bill  they  have  passed,  decided  that  it  was  a 
Constitution  perfect,  so  far  as  Kansas  was  con- 
cerned, not  to  be  passed  upon  any  further  by  the 
people ;  and  he  says  this  bill  so  treats  it.  If  I 
understand  it,  it  does  not  so  treat  it.  It  submits 
a  certain  question  to  the  people;  that  is,  whether 
they  will  accept  those  land  grants ;  and  it  pro- 
vides that,  if  they  accept  those  land  grants,  then, 
and  in  that  case,  Lecompton  shall  stand  as  the 
Constitution ;  but  it  further  provides,  that  if 
they  reject  that  proposition  in  regard  to  the  land 
grants,  they  reject  the  Lecompton  Constitution. 
Now,  I  ask,  is  it  true,  as  the  Senator  from  Vir- 
ginia says,  that  that  is  consistent  with  any  for- 
mer action  of  the  Senate  ?  Does  it  not  submit 
a  question  to  the  people  by  which  they  may  re- 
ject the  Lecompton  Constitution  ?  Certainly  it 
does.  Did  not  the  Senate  say,  in  the  former 
bill,  to  those  people,  "  it  is  all  perfected  on  your 
side,  and  you  shall  have  no  opportunity  to  reject 
Lecompton?'  Yes,  they  did,  unconditionally; 
and  I  say  they  now  propose  a  question  to  the 
people  by  which  the  people  may  reject  Lecomp- 


ton  ;  and  yet  you  say  that  you  do  not  subject  the 
Leconipton  Constitution  to  tlieir  vote!  The  two 
are  utterly  inconsistent ;  and  there  is  no  ingenu- 
ity or  sophistry,  though  the  gentleman  may  have 
much  of  the  former,  if  not  of  the  latter,  which 
can  by  possibility  disguise  or  blink  this  out  of 
sight. 

But,  sir,  as  I  said,  this  proposition  provides  for 
submitting  to  the  people  of  Kansas  a  question  in 
relation  to  land  grants — whether  they  will  ac- 
cept a  certain  proposition  in  relation  to  lands. 
It  further  provides  that,  if  they  will  not  accept 
that,  then,  and  in  that  case,  Lecompton  goes 
aside,  and  the  people  of  Kansas  are  to  remain  in 
their  Territorial  condition  for  a  length  of  time 
entirely  indefinite.  It  says  they  may  have  a  Con- 
vention when  they  have  a  suthcient  number  of 
people  to  entitle  them  to  a  Representative  in 
Congress.  That  number  is  now  ninety-four 
thousand;  but,  after  the  next  census,  in  .1860, 
it  may  be  one  hundred  and  twenty  or  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  thousand  ;  we  know  not.  When 
that  time  will  arrive,  we  know  not.  Then,  the 
amount  of  it  is,  that  it  is  an  indefinite  delay ;  it 
shall  be  indefinitely  deferred. 

Besides,  it  is  as  much  as  saying  to  them,  "we 
make  you  this  oifer  of  land,  but  if  you  will  not 
take  this  offer  of  land,  liberal  as  it  is,  now,  see 
the  danger  you  run  of  never  getting  it."  Again, 
this  same  bill  provides  that  a  different  board 
shall  be  created  to  direct  and  supervise  the  elec- 
tion. It  proposes  to  add  a  member,  the  District 
Attorney,  appointed  by  the  President,  to  the  Gov- 
ernor and  Secretary,  so  that  they  shall  have 
three — a  controlling  mnjority  of  that  board  over 
the  pre;nding  officers  of  the  two  Houses  of  the 
Legislature.     We  view  this  as  entirely  unfair. 

The  first  objection  that  occurs  to  my  mind  is 
the  form  in  which  this  question  is  attempted  to 
be  presented  to  the  people  of  Kansas.  This  has 
been  very  well  defined  by  the  honorable  Senator 
from  Kentucky,  [Mr.  Crittekden.]  It  is  to  put 
to  them  one  question,  by  the  answer  to  which 
they  are  to  decide  another  question  that  has  no 
relationship  to  it.  You  might  as  well  put  the 
question  to  that  people,  "will  you  vote  that 
you  will  be  freemen?"  and  now  we  say  to  you, 
"  if  you  vote  that  you  will  be  freemen,  you 
shall  have  the  Topeka  Constitution;  but  if  you 
vote  tluit  you  will  not  be  freemen,  then  you  shall 
remain  in  a,  Territorial  condition."  There  is  no 
more  relationship  between  the  acceptance  of  this 
grant  of  land  and  the  character  of  ihis  Constitu- 
tion, than  there  would  be  between  the  question 
proposed  and  the  result  that  was  to  follow  in 
the  ca^se  I  have  just  put.  There  is  no  necessary 
legal  sequence  or  connection  between  the -two 
questions.  The  proposition  is  therefore  artificial, 
deceptive  in  its  consequences.  You  put  to  a  man 
the  question,  "  Sir,  will  you  take  such  grants  of 
land  ;  as  a  citizen  of  Kansas,  are  you  willing  to 
receive  such  grants?"  "Yes,"  says  he,  "I  am." 
"Well,  will  you  vo  e  so?"  "I  do  not  see  why 
I  should  not  vote  so."  "  Well,  we  tell  you  now, 
if  you  will  vote  to  accept  these  grants,  you  shall 
take  the  Lecompton  Constitution  that  you  have 
rejected."  In  short,  "if  you  will  not^vote  against 
a  favorable  offer,  you  shall  have  imposed  upon 


^  «  7 


'  I S  •'^  ^"^  D       it 

^^  .b  O  Ki       L  i 
you  a  Constitution  to  which  yon  are  opposed, 

and  you  must  vote  against  a  favorable  offer  in 
order  to  get  rid  of  an  obnoxious  Constitution. 
You  must  vote  against  what  you  desire,  in  order 
that  you  maj^  get  rid  of  a  greater  evil.  If  you 
vote  for  these  grants  which  are  acceptable  to 
you,  and  liberal  in  their  character,  you  do  it  at 
'the  peril  of  taking  upon  you  a  Constitution  that 
you  detest."  It  is  the  ver^-  manner  in  which  the 
question  is  put  to  the  people  which  is  objection- 
able. It  is  artificial  in  its  character;  it  is  calcu- 
lated to  mislead. 

We  have  complained  a  great  deal  that  the 
Lecompton  Constitution  was  submitted  to  the 
people  in  regard  to  the  question  of  Slavery,  in  a 
certain  manner,  which  was  unfair,  deceptive, 
and  dealing  in  duplicity.  That  submission  was 
this:  "You  may  vote  for  the  Constitution  with 
Slavery,  or  for  the  Constitution  without  Slavery  ; 
but  you  have  to  vote  for  the  Constitution,  at  any 
rate,  which  has  Slavery  in  it  in  either  case." 
Xow,  how  is  it  here  ?  We  put  to  you  the  ques- 
tion, "Will  you  vote  for  these  land  grants?  But 
now  remember,  if  you  vot^  for  the  land  grants 
you  are  to  have  this  slave  Constitution,  and  if 
you  vote  against  the  land  grants  you  are  to 
have  Slavery  in  your  Territory  without  a  Con- 
stitution." That  is,  you  are  to  have  a  Constitu- 
tion with  Slavery,  or  Slavery  without  a  Consti- 
tution, but  Slavery  at  any  rate.  That  seems  to 
me  to  be  the  way  in  which  the  question  is  put 
to  them  ;  because  you  hold  that,  under  the  Dred 
icott  decision,  it  is  a  slaveholding  Territory, 
and  therefore,  if  the  people  vote  for  these  land 
grants  they  are  to  take  a  slaveholding  State 
Constitution,  and  if  they  vote  against  them,  they 
are  to  endure  Slavery  under  a  Territorial  form  of 
government.     That  is  the  alternative. 

The  next  objection  I  have  to  the  manner  in 
which  this  new  bill  presents  the  question  is  to 
1  he  provision  in  regard  to  population.  It  seemed 
to  be  agreed  on  all  hands,  and  it  was  provided 
in  the  bill  passed  by  the  Senate,  that  the  num- 
bers of  the  people  of  Kansas  were  sufficient  to 
justify  their  admission.  They  had  numbers 
enough  to  admit  them  two  years  ago,  if  they 
would  make  a  Constitution  to  suit  j^ou.  You 
thought  they  had  numbers  enough  to  admit  them 
under  the  Lecompton  Constitution.  There  are 
numbers  enough  of  them  now  to  justify  their 
admission  as  a  Sate,  if  they  vote  for  this  Con- 
stitution ;  but  you  give  them  to  understand  that 
there  are  not  numbers  enough,  if  they  vote 
against  this  Constitution,  to  make  a  free  one. 
We  have  here  a  proposition  that  Kansas  shall  be 
admitted  if  she  will  have  a  slave  Constitution, 
and  shall  not  be  admitted  if  she  will  not  have  a 
slave  Constitution.  There  are  people  enough  to 
hold  slaves,  but  not  people  enough  to  enjoy  Free- 
dom I  This,  it  seems  to  us,  is  a  palpable  injus- 
tice—an entirely  different  alfair  from  the  House 
amendment. 

In  the  next  place,  the  proposition  which  is  now 
before  us  produces  no  finality;  it  makes  no  set- 
tlement,. It  only  makes  a  settlement  provided 
they  adopt  the  Lecompton  Constitution,  by  voting 
in  favor  of  these  grants  of  land.  That  will  make 
a  Cuality ;  and  that  is  the  only  finality  under  this 


proposition — a  finality  in  one  result.  If  the  peo- 
ple do  not  vote  to  accej)t  these  grants,  it  provides 
for  no  finality,  no  settlement,  but  leaves  things 
in  slatu  quo  by  declaring  that  the  people  of  Kan- 
sas shall  remain  under  a  Territorial  form  of  gov- 
ernment for  an  indefinite  and  unlimited  period  of 
time.  I  do  not  know  that  that  part  of  the  prop- 
osition will  really  have  much  practical  effect.  It 
seems  to  me  to  be  rather  bruliim  fuhncn,  because 
I  suppose  Congress  can  at  any  time  admit  them, 
notwithstanding  this  declaration;  but,  after  all, 
that  is  the  effect  it  is  intended  to  have  on  the 
minds  of  the  people  of  Kansas.  It  is  intended 
if  tliis  bill  passes,  that  they  shall  understand  that 
,f  they  do  not  accept  this  proposition,  this  shall 
be  a  bar  to  their  coming  in  until  they  have  a  cer- 
tain  population. 

Another  objection,  and  one  to  which  I  have 
alluded  before,  is  that  we  are  not  content  with 
this  newly-constituted  board  to  supervise  the 
elections;  we  are  not  willing  to  take  results  pro- 
duced under  such  supervision,  so  as  to  say  that 
the-  President,  upon  the  returns  being  made  to 
him,  shall  issue  his  proclartiation,  and  Kansas 
become  a  State,  without  those  returns  being 
suiiniitted  to  our  examination.  If  a  board  were 
constituted  in  the  manner  provided  in  the  House 
amendment,  we  had  so  much  C(;ntidence  in  that 
manner  of  constituting  the  board  that  we  were 
willing  to  pass  it ;  but  we  are  not  willing  to  have 
a  bo;;:  J  constituted  in  the  manner  provided  in 
this  bill,  and  trust  in  the  result.  The  history 
of  affairs  in  Kansas  is  such  as  leads  us  to  be 
cautious  on  that  subject.  We  all  cannot  but 
know,  at  any  rate  a  large  portion  of  us  are  con- 
vinced, that  the  elections  in  Kansas  have  been, 
either  by  violence  at  the  polls,  or  by  fraud  and 
false  returns  afterwards,  so  conducted  that  a 
.='mall  minority  of  the  people  have  been  kept  in 
power.  I  need  not  go  over  the  evidences  of  this. 
The  history  of  the  transaction  is  full  of  them  at 
every  step. 

There  is  another  thing  that  we  cannot  but  re- 
member. Whatever  officers,  especially  leading 
officers,  who  have  been  appointed  in  that  Terri- 
tory by  the  Executive  of  this  Government,  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  have  favored  any 
degree  of  fairness  to  the  majority  of  that  people, 
have  desired  to  secure  them  at  all  against  the 
influence  of  violence  and  fraud,  have  incurred 
the  Executive  displeasure.  This  remark  will  ap- 
ply, I  think,  to  all  the  Government  officers  there 
who  have  evinced  any  fairness,  whether  we  refer 
to  Governor  Reeder,  Governor  Geary,  acting  Sec- 
retary Stanton,  or  Governor  Walker.  In  all 
cases  where  there  has  been  manifested  a  disposi- 
tion to  do  fairness,  and  to  get  rid  of  frauds,  the 
officers  who 'have  manifested  such  a  disposition 
have  certainly  incurred  Executive  displeasure 
and  its  consequences  ;  and  therefore  we  sup[)Ose 
that  whatever  officers  are  appointed  by  the  Ex- 
ecutive will  read  the  history  of  their  own  fate 
in  that  of  those  who  have  preceded  them,  and 
will  consult  their  own  security  in  what  they  are 
doing.  We  believe  we  cannot  find  any  safety  in 
this  proposition,  when  the  majority  of  the  super- 
vising board  who  have  charge  of  the  elections  is 
given  into  the  control  of  officers  created  by  the 


Government  of  the  United  States ;  superseding 
and  overriding  the  officers  aj)pointed  by  the  peo- 
ple of  Kansas.  This  is  a  feature  which  we  re- 
gard as  of  vital  importance,  and  to  which  we 
cannot  consent.  When  I  say  that,  I  speak  for 
myself,  and  not  by  authority  from  any  of  my 
associates,  any  further  than  I  derive  it  from  the 
action  which  I  have. already  witnessed  at  their 
hands.  I  have  no  direct  authoiiiy  to  speak  for 
them. 

Now,  sir,  the  whole  of  this  proposition  amounts 
to  this :  it  is  saying  to  the  people  of  Kansas,  you 
may  vote  for  the  Lecompton  Constitution,  but  if 
you  do  not  have  that,  you  shall  have  nothing. 
We  are  calling  upon  the  people  of  Kansas  to  act 
on  the  great  question  of  forming  their  Constitu- 
tion— of  forming,  ratifying,  or  putting  in  ojiera- 
tion,  if  you  please,  by  their  votes,  the  Constitu- 
tion of  their  proposed  State  Government  It  is 
fundamental,  it  is  the  first  great  principle  of  self- 
government.  Now, you  call  upon  ihat  people  to 
act  on  that  subject,  and  do  you  secure  to  them 
even  what  was  promised  in  the  Cincinnati  plat- 
form? Its  pledge  was,  that  in  forming  a  State 
Constitution  the  people  should  be  left  perfectly 
free  to  mould  their  institutions  in  their  own  way. 
Now,  the  people  of  Kansas  are  called  n]>on  to 
take  action  about  the  adoption  of  a  Constitution, 
to  pass  a  vote  which  shall  put  that  Constitution 
in  force,  or  reject  it;  and  are  they  left  free? 
They  are  trammelled  up  to  that  one  single  act, 
whether  they  will  have  the  Lecompton  Constitu- 
tion or  have  nothing.  They  are  not  left  free  to 
form  any  Constitution  they  want,  to  shape  any 
Constitution  as  they  may  desire  it  to  be,  in  rela- 
tion to  any  of  their  institutions.  In  short,  the 
vote  seems  to  be  very  much  like  the  case  of  Na- 
poleon III,  who  allowed  the  people  of  France  to 
vote,  not  whether  you  will  have  an  Emperor, 
not  who  will  you  have  as  Emperor,  but  will  you 
have  me  for  Emperor?     That  is  all. 

Mr.  President,  I  wish  now  to  say  a  few  words 
in  regard  to  the  views  presented  by  the  honor- 
able Senator  from  Virginia.  He  says  this  bill  is 
in  exact  consistency  with  that  which  the  Senate 
before  passed.  I  have  shown  in  one  respect 
wherein  it  differs ;  but  that  is  not  all.  What 
was  the  trouble  with  that  bill?  He  says  that 
bill  merely  declared,  in  relation  to  the  ordinance, 
that  we  did  not  ratify  it ;  that  we  disclaimed  it, 
and  did  not  provide  for  the  state  of  things  that 
would  result  if  the  people  of  Kansas  should  not 
agree  to  this  condition  on  which  they  were  to  be 
admitted;  and,  therefore,  this  bill  goes  on  to 
provide  for  that  contingency.  Well,  sir,  if  the 
bill  which  the  Senate  pissed  was  obnoxious  to 
that  difficulty,  why  on  earth  did  they  pass  it  at 
all  ?  If  it  was  an  objection  that  you  ought  to 
make  provision  for  the  contingency  of  the  people 
in  a  Convention,  or  by  their  own  votes,  refusing 
to  ratify  the  amended  ordinance  which  you  sub- 
mitted to  them,  then  why  did  you  go  on  to  pass 
a  bill  by  which  you  admitted  them  on  condition 
that  they  should  not  have  the  ordinance  which 
the  Convention  had  made  ?  The  Senator  from 
Virginia  says  the  difficulty  is  in  regard  to  the 
ordinance  proposing  the  terms  on  which  the 
State  shall  agree  to  forego  the  right  of  taxing 


the  public  lands,  if  it  hag  that  right,  and  the 
grants  in  consideration  of  which  it  will  yield 
that  right.  He  says  that  is  a  matter  on  which 
tlie  State  should  pass,  as  a  people,  by  themselves, 
or  by  their  delegates ;  and  that,  until  they  do  that, 
you  cannot  admit  them  as  a  State,  unless  they 
have  themselves  delegated  that  povver  to  their 
own  Convention.  Then,  I  ask,  how  came  the 
Senate  to  pass  the  original  bill,  by  which  they 
jumped  over  all  objections  of  that  kind?  I  say 
this  is  a  different  thing,  and  inconsistent  with 
that  bill  in  that  respect.  But  the  truth  is,  all 
that  amounted  to  nothing,  for  the  ordinance  is 
no  part  of  the  Constitution.  Tliey  claim  certain 
grants  of  land.  If  we  receive  them  under  their 
Constitution,  without  disclaiming  the  ordinance, 
we  make  the  grants  ;  but  the  bill  passed  by  the 
Senate  provided  that  they  should  be  admitted 
on  coadition  that  the  ordinance  should  be  of  no 
effect,  and  further  provided  that  nothing  con- 
tained in  the  bill  should  exclude  tnem  from 
claiming  what  had  been  granted  to  Minnesota, 
(which  is  what  is  now  offered,)  or  prevent  Con- 
gress from  making  grants  whenever  it  chose. 
Was  not  that  left  riglit?  I  see  no  objection  to 
that  part  of  the  bill ;  there  never  was  any  objec- 
tion made  to  that  on  this  side  of  the  Chamber,  I 
believe.  Neither  the  people  there  nor  anywhere 
else  made  any  objection  to  it  on  that  ground. 
No,  sir,  this  is  a  mere  device.  There  has  never 
been  any  issue  of  that  kind  made  in  any  quarter, 
by  any  man,  or  by  any  paper  in  Kansas,  here,  or 
elsewhere.  It  is  altogether  an  after-thought,  a 
device  cooked  up  for  tbis  occasion. 

The  honorable  Senator  from  Virginia  claims 
that  this  very  proposition  does  that  which  would 
settle  this  controversy,  as  he  thinks.  Well,  then, 
he  must  think  they  are  going  to  adopt  the  Le- 
compton  Constitution,  I  suppose;  but  he  hardly 
intimates  that.  He  hardly  believes  they  will  do 
that.  What  then?  It  will  leave  Kansas  in  a 
Territorial  condition,  and  then,  he  says,  we  shall 
have  a  guaranty  of  peace  for  three,  four,  five,  or 
six  years.  Wherein  is  that  guaranty  of  peace  ? 
May  not,  and  will  not,  the  same  controversy  con- 
tinue in  Kansas  as  heretofore  ?  Shall  we  have 
taken  any  step  to  cure  it?  Not  at  all.  Will 
they  not  continue  to  call  Conventions,  and  ask 
for  admission  into  the  Union  when  they  please? 
Certainly;  but  oh,  it  is  said,  we  have  provided 
here  that  the}'  shall  not  be  admitted  until  they 
have  the  proper  number.  That,  however,  does 
not  prevent  Congress  from  admitting  them,  nor 
prevent  them  from  asking  for  admission.  Every 
bone  of  contention,  every  apple  of  discord,  every 
point  of  difficulty  which  has  ever  agitated  Kan- 
sas or  the  country  on  this  subject,  remains,  and 
will  remain  until  they  are  admitted  as  a  State. 
It  is  vain  to  suppose  that  we  are  going  to  local- 
ize the  quarrel  now,  any  more  thun  we  have  suc- 
ceeded in  doing  so  heretofore.  The  people  of 
this  Union,  in  all  parts  of  it,  particularly  in  the 
North  and  South,  have  taken  too  deep  an  interest 
in  the  question  involved,  to  permit  it  to  go  on 
without  their  participating  in  it,  in  interest  at  least. 
They  will  partake  in  it.  Hence,  this  proposed  bill 
will  leave,  and  it  does  leave,  at  any  rate  in  one  re- 
sult, all  the  difficulties  open  to  perpetual  agitation. 


Mr.  President,  disguise  this  matter  as  we  may, 
there  is  one  fact  of  which,  I  think,  we  must  be 
morally  convinced,  that  the  Lecompton  Consti- 
tution is  abhorrent  to  the  views  and  feelings  and 
opinions  of  a  large  mnjority  of  the  people  of  Kan- 
sas. I  doubt  whether  a  man  can  be  found  who 
will  question  that  fact.  The  very  message  v/hich 
the  President  of  the  United  States  has  sent  to  us 
on  the  subject,  imports  that.  He  says  that  the 
|)eople  of  Kansas  were  so  strangely  attached  to 
the  Topeka  Constitution  that  it  was  of  no  use  to 
submit  to  them  any  other,  for  they  would  reject 
it;  and  it  was  not  submitted  to  the  people  because 
it  would  be  rejected.  So  it  is  in  relation  to  the 
action  of  the  delegates  to  the  ('onvention  who 
had  promised  to  submit  the  Constitution  to  the 
people,  and  did  not  do  so.  After  all,  why  was  it 
that  they  did  not  submit  it  to  the  people?  Can 
any  man  present  any  other  possible  reason,  than 
because  they  knew  the  Constitution  would  be 
rejected?  The  vote  which  was  taken  on  the  4th 
of  January,  even  if  you  count  on  the  other  side 
all  the  voles  given  on  the  21st  of  December, 
leaves  no  possible  doubt  about  it,  I  suppose 
that  all  the  people  in  Kansas  who  desired  to  have 
the  Lecompton  Constitution,  voted  for  it,  either 
with  or  without  Slavery,  on  the  2  Ist  of  December. 
Six  thousand  votes  were  returned  as  having  been 
cast  on  that  occasion.  I  do  not  think  more  ihaa 
half  of  them  were  really  cast,  but  call  it  six 
thousand.  I  suppose  that  about  all  the  people 
of  Kansas  who  desired  to  reject  that  Constitu- 
tion altogether,  voted  against  it  on  the  4th  of 
January — more  than  ten  thousand.  Under  these 
circumstances,  can  there  be  any  reasonable  doubt 
as  to  the  views  of  the  people  of  Kansas?  None 
at  all.  Viewing  it  in  that  light,  I  consider  it  alto- 
gether wrong  to  resort  to  any  contrivances,  any 
d'  vices,  any  expedients,  on  the  part  of  Congress, 
to  endeavor  to  get  rid  of  that  expression  of  the 
will  of  the  pco[ile,  and  to  fix  upon  them,  in  any 
way,  a  Constitution  that  we  know  they  do  not 
desire. 

This  proposition  is  subject  to  all  the  exceptions 
I  have  made  to  it,  and  yet  more.  It  proposes  to 
submit  the  question  to  the  people  of  Kansas  at 
such  a  time,  in  such  a  form,  and  under  such  pe- 
culiar circumstances,  that  we  must  see  that  it  is 
intended,  at  least  it  is  well  calculated  and  inge- 
niously devised,  to  secure,  if  [)ossible,  the  suc- 
cess of  the  Lecompton  Constitution,  whether  the 
people  really  desire  it  or  not.  Among  the  other 
means  which  may  be  counted  upon  for  possible 
success  in  this  vote  is  the  improbability  of  getting 
the  people  to  vote  against  a  proposition  for  lands, 
which  proposition  they  like,  because  a  Constitu- 
tion may  follow.  Is  it  not  operating  as  a  blind 
on  the  people?  "  Here  is  a  fair  and  fiberal  prop- 
osition of  land  to  yon  :  do  you  not  like  it?  "  Every- 
man may  say,  "I  like  it."  Then  comes  the  (jues- 
tion,  "Will  you  vote  for  it?"  "No;  I  will  not 
vote  for  it,  because  I  will  have  to  take  such  a  Con- 
stitution with  it."  Is  it  to  be  expected  that  every 
man  in  Kansas  will  understand  that?  Is  not  the 
very  manner  in  which  the  question  is  presented 
to  him  calculated  to  disguise  the  real  question, 
and  to  delude  him  ? 

Again,  we  know  that  that  people  have  been 


6 


harassed  and  dragooned,  and  continued  under 
all  sorts  of  violent  o|)pre3sion3  wliich  the  forms 
of  law  wotild  allow,  for  many  j-ears  in  succes- 
sion. I  need  not  go  over  the  story  of  the  vio- 
lence and  the  wrongs  which  they  have  suffered  ; 
but  they  have  suffered,  and  that  long  and  se- 
verely. They  very  much  need  repose.  Now,  you 
propose  to  thera  that  they  may  have  repose. 
How?  If  they  will  take  Slavery.  Otherwise 
they  are  to  have  no  repose,  no  security,  but  are 
to  be  subjected  to  a  still  longer  continuance  of 
their  sufferings,  and  to  endure  longer  t-ibula- 
tion. 

In  the  next  place,  it  may  be  counted  that  they 
will  vote  for  ii,  because  all  those  who  desire  the 
places  of  Senators  and  Representatives  and  Gov- 
ernors and  Secretaries  and  Treasurers  and  other 
ollices,  all  those  who  hope  for  and  have  some 
reasonable  expectation  of  succeeding  in  obtain- 
ing some  of  these  offices,  desire  to  get  Kansas  in 
a  State  foim  as  soon  as  possible.  You  will  have 
all  that  weight  to  obtain  a  particular  slavehold- 
ing  Constitution,  though  it  is  not  the  Constitu- 
tion the  people  desire.  Besides,  you  have  the 
assistance  of  the  Territorial  officers  appointed  by 
the  Executive.  They  well  know  what  the  ruling 
m-.jority  here  desire  to  effect.  They  know  that 
they  desire  to  eftect  the  adoption  of  the  Lecomp- 
ton  Constitution.  That  is  perfectly  understood 
by  the  Governor,  the  Secretary,  the  Marshal,  the 
District  Attorney,  the  land  officers,  and  all  the 
other  officers  of  this  Government  in  the  Territory 
of  Kansas.  All  their  aid  is  to  be  counted  upon. 
That  would  not  be  so,  if  it  were  submitted  to  the 
people  to  make  such  a  Constitution  as  they  de- 
sired. That  would  be  an  entirely  different  effect, 
and  then  the  action  and  influence  of  these  offi- 
cers might  be  entirely  neutralized. 

Further,  instead  of  saying  to  the  people  of 
Kansas,  "you  may  settle  this  question  by  firm- 
ing such  a  Constitution  as  you  want,''  this  prop- 
osition gives  them  no  such  opportunity.  It  is  so 
frarai'd  as  to  present  to  the  world  this  view  :  "  The 
majority  in  Congress  have  always  desired  to  have 
this  matter  settled,  hut  the  Kansas  people  want 
to  kee[)  it  up,  and  the  Abolitionists  try  to  make 
them  keep  it  up.  Now,  we  have  offered  to  let 
them  make  a  State  Constitution  if  they  please ; 
that  is,  to  take  the  Lecompton  Constitution  ;  but 
they  have  coolly  rejected  it."  This  being  done, 
it  may  be  argued,  "  Can  we  not  say  to  the  whole 
■world,  do  you  not  see  that  it  is  the  Kansas  peo- 
ple that  try  to  keep  the  question  open  ?  they 
would  not  adopt  the  Constitution  we  offered 
them ; "  and  they  must  incur  displeasure  and 
prejudice  for  trying  ti  keep  the  question  open, 
when  you  have  given  them  no  opportunity  fairly 
to  close  it.. 

There  is  another  consideration  to  which  this 
proposition  addresses  itself,  calculated  to  give  it 
success.  The  people  of  Kansas  have  been  told 
by  the  Executive  of  the  United  States,  that  if 
they  would  only  get  to  be  a  State,  especially  if 
they  would  get  to  be  a  slave  State,  it  would  be 
the  shortest  and  quickest  road  to  obtain  a  free 
State,  because  they  have  the  right  any  day  to 
alter  the  Constitution,  and  can  do  it  immediate- 
ly.    The  President  told  them  so.     The  report  of 


the  Committee  on  Territories,  who  presented  the 
bill  passed  by  the  Senate,  substantially  endorsed 
the  same  doctrine  ;  and  gentlemen  here  say  it  is 
contained  in  the  Lecompton  Constitution,  al- 
though that  Constitution  provides  for  one  mode 
of  amendment,  which  mode  is,  that  it  may  be 
amended  after  1864,  by  a  two-thirds  majority  in 
both  Houses  of  the  Legislature,  and  then  sub- 
mitting the  amendment  to  the  people — an  im- 
practicable mode. 

Now,  the  people  of  Kansas  are  to  be  presented 
with  this  question,  in  the  form  of  which  I  have 
spoken,  under  this  sort  of  assurance.  I  have  no 
doubt  that  it  is  expected,  certainlj-  it  is  very  well 
calculated,  to  indilce  that  people  to  vote  for  the 
Constitution ;  and,  indeed,  in  a  recently-pub- 
lished letter  of  Governor  Robinson,  he  says,  that 
if  there  was  no  doubt  as  to  how  the  certificates 
would  be  given  to  the  officers  chosen  at  the  elec- 
tion which  has  already  taken  place,  he  thinks  it 
would  be  well  even  to  have  the  Lecompton  Con- 
stitution put  on  them,  because  thej'  would  have 
the  controlling  power;  and  he  says  that  people 
are  fatigued  with  their  long  political  agitation, 
and  in  need  of  rest,  and  desirous  of  going  about 
their  industrial  pursuits.  Is  not  this  whole  prop- 
osition well  calculated  to  secure  a  vote  of  that 
long-oppressed  people,  desirous  of  peace,  even 
for  what  they  do  not  want?  The  truth  is,  it  ad- 
dresses them  on  motives  of  that  kind.  If  they 
follow  it,  they  will  certainly  be  deluded.  Just 
so  sure  as  the  Lecompton  Constitution  is  put  into 
effect  and  operation,  it  will  not  be  altered  and 
amended.  If  they  attempt  to  amend  it  immedi- 
ately upon  its  being  put  into  operation  b^-  the 
action  of  the  newly-elected  Legislature,  the  Gov- 
ernor would  veto  the  act.  The  Free-State  peo- 
ple have  not  got  two-thirds  of  the  Legislature, 
and  they  are  not  to  have  it  anyhow.  The  at- 
tempt to  amend  the  Constitution  will  be  stopped  ; 
but  if  it  were  to  go  on,  whenever  that  resolves 
itself  into  a  judicial  question,  as  it  may  at  any 
time,  and  is  presented  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States,  it  will  no  doubt  be  decided  that  the 
people  cannot  alter  their  Constitution  contrary 
to  the  provisions  of  that  Constitution.  It  will 
be  held  that  it  is  a  sort  of  national  compact  by 
which  people  have  come  into  the  government  of 
the  majority  on  that  condition ;  and  being  thus  in 
the  nature  of  a  compact,  it  is  incapable  of  being 
changed,  except  agreeably  to  the  terms  of  the 
comi)act  itself.  They  will  be  deluded  in  that; 
and  I  suppose,  indeed  I  know,  that  this  is  well 
calculated  to  delude  them.  Whether  it  will  do 
so  effectually,  time  must  determine. 

I  have  very  little  hesitation  in  saying  that, 
whatever  may  take  place,  if  this  question  of  ac- 
cepting the  land  grants  is  presented  to  the  peo- 
ple under  this  bill,  rely  upon  it,  Mr.  President — 
1  speak  merely  from  the  lessons  which  the  his- 
tory of  Kansas  has  taught  me — a  majority  will 
be  returned  in  favor  of  accepting  the  land  grants. 
I  say  that  a  majority  will  be  returned  for  it,  in 
all  human  probability,  whatever  the  actual  votes 
may  be.  I  do  not  agree  with  the  honorable  Sen- 
ator from  Kentucky,  that  the  result  will  be  other- 
wise, and  that  the  proposition  will  be  rejected.  I 
do  not  say  that  1  do  not  believe  a  majority  of  the 


people  will  vote  against  it;  but  I  say  the  returns 
will  show  a  majority  the  other  way  ;  and  when 
I  say  that,  I  speak  merely  from  the  lessons  taught 
me  by  the  history  of  Kansas  itself 

There  is  another  matter  that  equally  bears  on 
this  proposition,  and  addresses  itself  to  us  on  this 
occasion.  An  election  has  been  held  under  the 
Lecompton  Constitution ;  and  if  the  people  accept 
these  land  grants  with  this  condition,  of  course, 
then,  I  take  it,  they  are  to  abide  by  that  election. 
Now,  can  anybody  tell  me  what  is  the  result  of 
that  election?  Does  not  the  final  and  ultimate 
determination  of  it  rest  with  a  certain  Mr.  Cal- 
houn to-day  ?  Is  it  not  altogether  within  his 
hands  and  under  his  control?  Most  unquestion- 
ably it  is.  If  the  people  do  as  they  may  do  under 
this  proposition,  and  as  it  is  calculated  to  have 
them  do — accept  the  Lecompton  Constitution 
under  the  belief  that  the  certificates  of  election 
are  to  be  actually  issued  to  a  majority  of  the 
representatives  of  the  Free-State  people,  they  will 
certainly  be  deluded. 

I  have  attempted  to  s.how  that  all  these  motives 
and  purposes  are  presented,  by  the  arrangement 
of  this  bill,  calculated,  not  to  carry  into  eflFect  the 
true  wishes  of  the  people  of  Kansas,  but  to  frus- 
trate and  evade  them,  and  obtain,  in  point  of  fact, 
from  these  motives  and  considerations,  a  vote  of 
that  people,  by  vvitiich  they  shall  take  upon  them- 
selves this  slave  Constitution,  abhorrent  to  their 
feelings. 

Mr.  President,  I  do  not  wish  to  detain  the  Sen- 
ate longer.  I  have  stated  the  reasons  why,  in  my 
view,  we  cannot  vote  for  this  bill  that  is  now  pre- 


sented here,  whenever  it  shall  come  up  properly, 
proposed  by  the  committee  of  conference.  It  is 
utterly  inconsistent  with  all  the  views  we  have 
entertained,  and  utterly  inconsistent  with  the 
votes  we  have  given  in  relation  to  the  House 
amendment.  I  do  not  know  but  that,  if  it  be 
presented  to  them,  the  people  of  Kansas  will 
manifest  a  continuance  of  the  virtue  and  endu- 
rance they  have  heretofore  displayed,  by  which 
they  will  disregard  all  the  motives  and  induce- 
ments here  held  out  to  them,  hold  on  their  way, 
and  go  on  enduring  even  unto  the  end,  rejecting 
this  proposition.  It  is  possible  that  such  may  be 
the  result  of  their  discernment  and  their  virtue  ; 
but  I  think  we  have  little  reason  to  expect  that 
such  will  be  the  result.  Certain  I  am,  that  none 
of  these  gentlemen  who  contrived  this  bill,  and 
devised  the  form  in  which  it  is  presented,  expect 
to  have  any  such  result.  At  least  a  strong  hope 
is  entertained  that  it  will  secure  the  purposes 
for  which  it  is  designed  by  these  contrivances — 
secure  success  to  the  Lecompton  Constitution, 
whether  the  people  desire  it  or  not. 

Viewing  it  in  this  light,  regarding  it  in  this 
view,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  thing  itself,  in  its 
character  and  in  all  its  aspects,  is  utterly  incon- 
sistent with  that  conduct  which  becomes  an 
American  Senate — the  Congress  of  a  great  peo- 
ple, whose  conduct  should  be  distinguished  for 
directness,  for  frankness,  for  justness,  tor  fairness, 
not  for  cunning  and  device.  Sir,  I  think,  if  we 
intend  to  secure  the  confidence  and  command  the 
respect  of  the  people  of  this  great  and  discern- 
ing nation,  lovers  of  justice  as  they  are,  we  shall 
reject  this  proposition. 


PREPARE  FOR  THE  FALL  ELECTIONS. 


The  National  Republican  Association  have  completed  arrange- 
ments for  publishing  and  distril)ating  Tracts,  Essayt!,  .  and  Speeches, 
bearing  upon  the  important  question  now  agitating  the' country. 

Most  of  the  Speeches  delivered  in  Congi-ess  during  the  present 
session  by  the  Republican  meml)ers,  and  also  those  that  mny  hereafter 
be  delivered,  can  be  had,  enveloped  and  free  of  posfcujc,  at  75  cents  per 
100  for  eight-page,  and  $1.25  per  100  for  sixteen-page  Speeches. 

Our  Republican  friends  ought  to  take  immediate  steps  to  flood  every 
Congressional  district,  and  especiaily  districts  now  represented  by  Admin- 
istration Democrats,  with  these  Speeches  and  Documents.  Heretofore 
this  work  has  been  done  by  tlie  Members  of  Congi;ess  at  their  own  ex- 
pense, but  after  the  adjournment  of  Congress  this  responsibility  will  de- 
volve upon  other  friends  of  the  cause. 

The  jSTatioxal  Republican  Association  at  Washington  City  stand 
ready  to  lend  all  the  assistance  in  their  power. 

Send  in  your  orders  without  delay.     Address 

L.  CLEPHANE, 
Secretary  National  Republican  Association^ 
Washington^  D.  C. 

May  1, 1858. 


1205  03092  7600 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  9482 


